This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/dec/23/new-york-times-native-advertising-lowbrow
The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
Previous version
1
Next version
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| Even the New York Times can't resist going lowbrow with native advertising | Even the New York Times can't resist going lowbrow with native advertising |
| (35 minutes later) | |
| One of the anomalies of digital journalism is a lack of clarity between high and low. That's the historic distinction in publishing, mass from class, the vulgar from the refined, tabloid from broadsheet, the penny press from papers costing a nickel. | One of the anomalies of digital journalism is a lack of clarity between high and low. That's the historic distinction in publishing, mass from class, the vulgar from the refined, tabloid from broadsheet, the penny press from papers costing a nickel. |
| You knew who you were by what you read. You were what you read. | You knew who you were by what you read. You were what you read. |
| For writers, writing for the New Yorker was not only a different experience, and different purpose, but actually imputed different meaning than writing for, say, the Reader's Digest, or the New York Post, or, for that matter, Time. Even the upper segment was segmented, each brand cultivating its form of elitism. | For writers, writing for the New Yorker was not only a different experience, and different purpose, but actually imputed different meaning than writing for, say, the Reader's Digest, or the New York Post, or, for that matter, Time. Even the upper segment was segmented, each brand cultivating its form of elitism. |
| Now, in a sense, there is just Buzzfeed and its like, traffic magnet sites. Buzzfeed's editor, Ben Smith, is a credible journalist who now works in the middle of a random content stew, that, in another world, would have devalued his skills and undermined his career potential. But Smith, along with a whole generation of writers who exist outside of intellectual caste or conceit, is part of a flattened world, one in which there is only one real measure, traffic. And almost all traffic is low value. Hence the main job is getting more of it, and, if possible, to incrementally raise its value. | Now, in a sense, there is just Buzzfeed and its like, traffic magnet sites. Buzzfeed's editor, Ben Smith, is a credible journalist who now works in the middle of a random content stew, that, in another world, would have devalued his skills and undermined his career potential. But Smith, along with a whole generation of writers who exist outside of intellectual caste or conceit, is part of a flattened world, one in which there is only one real measure, traffic. And almost all traffic is low value. Hence the main job is getting more of it, and, if possible, to incrementally raise its value. |
| Which is why the New York Times now finds itself, grimly, and with the greatest self-pity, having to accept native advertising or branded content. In an achingly self-conscious memo, the Times publisher, Arthur Sulzberger (quite a big gun to announce a minor advertising development), tried to explain "our version of what is sometimes called 'native advertising' or 'branded content'" and why it would not offend Times readers or the Times' sensibility. | Which is why the New York Times now finds itself, grimly, and with the greatest self-pity, having to accept native advertising or branded content. In an achingly self-conscious memo, the Times publisher, Arthur Sulzberger (quite a big gun to announce a minor advertising development), tried to explain "our version of what is sometimes called 'native advertising' or 'branded content'" and why it would not offend Times readers or the Times' sensibility. |
| How advertising is handled has always been a key distinction between low and high order publishing. The higher you stood, the more separate you were from advertising, and, in the logic of snobbery, the greater a premium price the top brands would pay to be in your company. Whereas, lower order publishing (middle market newspapers, Sunday supplements, women's magazines, hobby magazines, trade magazines) has, traditionally, done pretty much anything that advertisers wanted. | |
| In the new digital world of content disaggregation (where you find a single article through search engines or social media referral, rather than seeking out a particular brand) and traffic aggregation (in which ad networks and programmatic buying now deliver huge audiences largely disconnected from a brand), snobbery has less and less of a place. | In the new digital world of content disaggregation (where you find a single article through search engines or social media referral, rather than seeking out a particular brand) and traffic aggregation (in which ad networks and programmatic buying now deliver huge audiences largely disconnected from a brand), snobbery has less and less of a place. |
| The New York Times' traffic, or, for that matter the New Yorker's, does not trade at much of a premium to Buzzfeed or Gawker, both sites that are now earning incrementally greater advertising rates with native advertising programs. | The New York Times' traffic, or, for that matter the New Yorker's, does not trade at much of a premium to Buzzfeed or Gawker, both sites that are now earning incrementally greater advertising rates with native advertising programs. |
| Native advertising is a response by ad-supported content sites to deal with the fact that display advertising – clearly separated advertising units on a given page – yields ever-more discouraging response rates. The alternative, a common practice of lower order publishing, is to create advertising content that is easily confused with editorial content, in the hope of raising response rates. | Native advertising is a response by ad-supported content sites to deal with the fact that display advertising – clearly separated advertising units on a given page – yields ever-more discouraging response rates. The alternative, a common practice of lower order publishing, is to create advertising content that is easily confused with editorial content, in the hope of raising response rates. |
| Suffice it to say, it is easier for an advertiser to mimic the hodge-podge of Buzzfeed content than to mimic, say, the New Yorker's content. Again, the high and low divide. Indeed, many of the most successful new content sites –Buzzfeed, Huffington Post, Gawker, Business Insider, and Glam Media, among them – are such an amalgam of aggregated content, partnership sharing agreements, pay per click modules, user generated contributions, and, as well, the blitherings of novice journalists (sometimes heralded as a return to long form), that it's very hard, if not pointless, to separate real content from phony stuff. Hence, the Times' angst. | Suffice it to say, it is easier for an advertiser to mimic the hodge-podge of Buzzfeed content than to mimic, say, the New Yorker's content. Again, the high and low divide. Indeed, many of the most successful new content sites –Buzzfeed, Huffington Post, Gawker, Business Insider, and Glam Media, among them – are such an amalgam of aggregated content, partnership sharing agreements, pay per click modules, user generated contributions, and, as well, the blitherings of novice journalists (sometimes heralded as a return to long form), that it's very hard, if not pointless, to separate real content from phony stuff. Hence, the Times' angst. |
| The Times' substantial investment in resources, quality controls, expertise, and exclusivity is now competing in a form better served by the opposite of those things. | The Times' substantial investment in resources, quality controls, expertise, and exclusivity is now competing in a form better served by the opposite of those things. |
| If the Times were more cunning and self-aware, you might say that its effort is not so much to embrace native advertising but to undermine it. By calling it out, putting boarders around it, and prominently labeling it for what it is, the Times not only destroys much of its value, but clearly demonstrates what a low form it is. | If the Times were more cunning and self-aware, you might say that its effort is not so much to embrace native advertising but to undermine it. By calling it out, putting boarders around it, and prominently labeling it for what it is, the Times not only destroys much of its value, but clearly demonstrates what a low form it is. |
| But business is a slippery slope and, if it works, even incrementally, the pressure at the Times will be to become more like Forbes, a once-respected brand that has turned its digital self into the inverse of high publishing. It's now all cheesy come ons. | But business is a slippery slope and, if it works, even incrementally, the pressure at the Times will be to become more like Forbes, a once-respected brand that has turned its digital self into the inverse of high publishing. It's now all cheesy come ons. |
| The Times, like everyone else, migrates to low publishing because it has lost the wherewithal to sell high publishing. This is partly because digital formats offer less and less of a venue for the Times to demonstrate its quality bona fides or cast its snobbish spell. But it is also because high publishing has been brought so low that its culture is now largely lost. New York, once the life blood of high publishing and ruled by its bishops, is now way too expensive for all but the most resourceful of this tribe. | The Times, like everyone else, migrates to low publishing because it has lost the wherewithal to sell high publishing. This is partly because digital formats offer less and less of a venue for the Times to demonstrate its quality bona fides or cast its snobbish spell. But it is also because high publishing has been brought so low that its culture is now largely lost. New York, once the life blood of high publishing and ruled by its bishops, is now way too expensive for all but the most resourceful of this tribe. |
| For their part, the underpaid young people working for digital outlets are unable to credibly look forward to jobs in high publishing so, naturally, stop seeing the distinction between high and low and come to live happily with native advertising and the schlock content that surrounds it. | For their part, the underpaid young people working for digital outlets are unable to credibly look forward to jobs in high publishing so, naturally, stop seeing the distinction between high and low and come to live happily with native advertising and the schlock content that surrounds it. |
| Of course, native advertising's real challenge is that its very low level means that anyone can do it, and that everyone will. More low publishers will jump into the game. There will be more low publishers. That has been the history of digital advertising innovation, everybody follows, because there are few barriers to entry. | Of course, native advertising's real challenge is that its very low level means that anyone can do it, and that everyone will. More low publishers will jump into the game. There will be more low publishers. That has been the history of digital advertising innovation, everybody follows, because there are few barriers to entry. |
| One of the great business virtues of high publishing was that it was a difficult business to enter. You had to stand for something. While high publishing was never the industry's most profitable niche, it was a protected one which conferred valuable status on those who were part of it, from advertisers to editors and writer and shareholders. And, too, because high status was the asset, the reason for being, there wasn't really a question about maintaining standards and trust. | One of the great business virtues of high publishing was that it was a difficult business to enter. You had to stand for something. While high publishing was never the industry's most profitable niche, it was a protected one which conferred valuable status on those who were part of it, from advertisers to editors and writer and shareholders. And, too, because high status was the asset, the reason for being, there wasn't really a question about maintaining standards and trust. |
| Alas. | Alas. |
| Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning. | Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning. |
Previous version
1
Next version